Sei said:
I really feel that this whole thing has been given so much attention lately, it is really bugging..
Its interesting you mention that, i suppose you mean all the media is talking about it endlessly.
What happened was an attack on local media tho the correct way to interperet it is as an attack on ALL media. What this action does is it builds on the dangers journalists face and directs it at their workplace, a much bigger target. The actions of just one journalist can have not only personal consequences but ALSO for the company she works for
The reason i'm told is because what Wagale said. If some one could provide a transcript of what was said may be we could understand better. But i still think regardless, silencing dissent in this manner is very serious. BT has the freedom to express the way he feels, but does not think others can do the same. The ppl that support this action are actually making themselves poorer in the long run. They support that their rights can be robbed from them.
Everybody likes to bash [pun intended] the media, there are times they well & truly deserve it. All they seek to do is grab attention for what appears to be trivial a lot of the time. But i would say, even this kind of media is better than one that is afraid to say what it wants to. Activism of this sort is the MAIN reason we rank quite low in press freedoms among the world. We are quite close to countries with govts that actively interfere in the media but the ironic thing is our govt does not do that. Its mostly interested parties and their supporters.
This does not mean the perps get away scot free, there were arrests but these are just pawns. What credible penalty is there to stop this happening again. WHO compensates IBN for this stunt ?
I was told even if BT gets pulled up, he still wins because of the 'persecuted victim' or martyr perception. He becomes a hero. This means that this action is WIN-WIN for BT. Its an audacious move, because if he can win against a bigger target, ie the media, it shows he is stronger than his opponents
Sei said:
Unnecessary violence is like breeding a snake which will eventually rear its ugly head and bite your face off.
On its own it happens everywhere very often. The dangerous bit is when it builds up momentum and when successive actions can be chained together without adequate opposition.
But to the instigators its not unecessary its just one of many tactics and every time it happens all the players make their own calculations, do they oppose or support. The cunning old man has to get back his glory one way or the other. I think he is the sole winner of this action and the ppl & his opponents are the loser (in this particular round).
If you want to keep your sanity it helps to look at these actions as just one of many matches in a 5 yr long game. One in which livelihoods, life itself & the future are played out, these are HUGE stakes. These actions are far from random they are all very carefully thought out & orchestrated for expected gains because the life of the party depends on them. If you can control the emotional response each time these actions take place then you see the gameplan better.
